The Compassionate Conservative strikes again:

By JENNIFER LOVEN

(AP) President Bush is seen in the Oval Office of the
White House in Washington, Wednesday, Dec. 12,...
Full Image



Google sponsored links
George W. Bush: Fast Poll - 30-second poll. Do
You Like President George Bush?
www.indpolls.com/gc/George-W


Anti Bush T-shirts - Anti-Bush T-shirts,
Stickers, Magnets, Dolls, etc.
www.northernsun.com








WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush vetoed legislation Wednesday that would
have expanded government-provided health insurance for children, his second
slap-down of a bipartisan effort in Congress to dramatically increase
funding for the popular program.

It was Bush's seventh veto in seven years - all but one coming since
Democrats took control of Congress in January. Wednesday was the deadline
for Bush to act or let the bill become law. The president also vetoed an
earlier, similar bill expanding the health insurance program.

Bush vetoed the bill in private.

In a statement notifying Congress of his decision, Bush said the bill was
unacceptable because - like the first one - it allows adults into the
program, would cover people in families with incomes above the U.S. median
and raises taxes.

"This bill does not put poor children first, and it moves our country's
health care system in the wrong direction," Bush's statement said.
"Ultimately, our nation's goal should be to move children who have no health
insurance to private coverage, not to move children who already have private
health insurance to government coverage."

Bush urged Congress to extend the program at its current funding level
before lawmakers leave Washington for their holiday break.

In fact, congressional leaders had already said earlier Wednesday that they
now will try only to extend the State Children's Health Insurance Program,
or SCHIP, well into 2008 in basically its current form. Their comments
signaled that they have given up efforts to substantially expand the
program.

The bill passed the Democratic-controlled Senate by a veto-proof margin, but
the same was not true in the House. Even after the bill was approved,
negotiations continued to find a compromise version that would attract
enough Republican lawmakers to override Bush's expected veto. A two-thirds
vote in both chambers is required to override a presidential veto.

But that effort was unsuccessful.

The bill Bush vetoed would have increased federal funding for SCHIP by $35
billion over five years, to add an estimated 4 million people to the program
that provides insurance coverage for children from families who earn too
much to qualify for Medicaid but cannot afford private insurance. The joint
federal-state program currently provides benefits to roughly 6 million
people, mostly children.

A major point of contention with the White House was Bush's demand that
nearly all poor children eligible for the program be found and enrolled
before any in slightly higher-income families could be covered. He
originally proposed adding $5 billion to the program over five years but
later said he was willing to go higher as long as his conditions were met.

The president also has opposed using an increased tobacco tax to fund the
program expansion. The bill includes a 61-cent rise on a package of
cigarettes.

Bush's veto in early October of a similar bill was narrowly upheld by the
House.

But such votes are uncomfortable for GOP lawmakers. It is a popular program
with the public, making some Republicans wary of sticking with Bush on such
an issue with the 2008 elections looming. Of the 43 million people
nationwide who lack health insurance, more than 6 million are under 18 years
old. That's more than 9 percent of all children.

House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said the House will take up the
extension question Thursday in a bill that also will make adjustments to
Medicare.

"We'll obviously need to put additional money" into the children's health
insurance program, Hoyer said, because several states say they will have to
remove recipients from their rolls if the current funding level continues
into next year.

Hoyer declined to say how much new money would go into the program or how
long it might be extended. In the past, top Democrats have suggested they
might extend the program until September or October, allowing them to
reconsider it shortly before the 2008 elections.

Leading up to Bush's quiet late-afternoon action, the White House and
Democratic leaders sought the upper hand with the public - with each blaming
the other for causing the stalemate and being unwilling to give ground.

In his veto statement, Bush said: "The leadership in the Congress has
refused to meet with my administration's representatives." White House press
secretary Dana Perino said that "even on a staff level, we weren't invited
to negotiate."

"They've instead been intransigent and sent us two bills that they knew he
wouldn't sign," she scoffed.

Not so, said Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid,
D-Nev.

For instance, Reid approached Bush to ask for negotiations during a ceremony
for the Dalai Lama in the Capitol Rotunda in mid-October, a couple of weeks
after Bush's first SCHIP veto, he said. The president told Reid, "No, I'm
not moving, meet with my staff," Reid said at the time.

"The fact is that Senator Reid and Speaker (Nancy) Pelosi asked to meet with
the president to discuss giving children the health care they need, and he
blew them off by telling them to talk to his staff," Manley said before the
veto. "Now he's going to veto it for a second time without negotiating
once."

---

Associated Press writer Charles Babington contributed to this report.

Good job George! Thanks for the update


"tak" <takirch@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:LYZ7j.353$7d1.150@news01.roc.ny...
> The Compassionate Conservative strikes again:
>
> By JENNIFER LOVEN
>
> (AP) President Bush is seen in the Oval Office of the
> White House in Washington, Wednesday, Dec. 12,...
> Full Image
>
>
>
> Google sponsored links
> George W. Bush: Fast Poll - 30-second poll.
> Do You Like President George Bush?
> www.indpolls.com/gc/George-W
>
>
> Anti Bush T-shirts - Anti-Bush T-shirts,
> Stickers, Magnets, Dolls, etc.
> www.northernsun.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush vetoed legislation Wednesday that would
> have expanded government-provided health insurance for children, his
> second slap-down of a bipartisan effort in Congress to dramatically
> increase funding for the popular program.
>
> It was Bush's seventh veto in seven years - all but one coming since
> Democrats took control of Congress in January. Wednesday was the deadline
> for Bush to act or let the bill become law. The president also vetoed an
> earlier, similar bill expanding the health insurance program.
>
> Bush vetoed the bill in private.
>
> In a statement notifying Congress of his decision, Bush said the bill was
> unacceptable because - like the first one - it allows adults into the
> program, would cover people in families with incomes above the U.S. median
> and raises taxes.
>
> "This bill does not put poor children first, and it moves our country's
> health care system in the wrong direction," Bush's statement said.
> "Ultimately, our nation's goal should be to move children who have no
> health insurance to private coverage, not to move children who already
> have private health insurance to government coverage."
>
> Bush urged Congress to extend the program at its current funding level
> before lawmakers leave Washington for their holiday break.
>
> In fact, congressional leaders had already said earlier Wednesday that
> they now will try only to extend the State Children's Health Insurance
> Program, or SCHIP, well into 2008 in basically its current form. Their
> comments signaled that they have given up efforts to substantially expand
> the program.
>
> The bill passed the Democratic-controlled Senate by a veto-proof margin,
> but the same was not true in the House. Even after the bill was approved,
> negotiations continued to find a compromise version that would attract
> enough Republican lawmakers to override Bush's expected veto. A two-thirds
> vote in both chambers is required to override a presidential veto.
>
> But that effort was unsuccessful.
>
> The bill Bush vetoed would have increased federal funding for SCHIP by $35
> billion over five years, to add an estimated 4 million people to the
> program that provides insurance coverage for children from families who
> earn too much to qualify for Medicaid but cannot afford private insurance.
> The joint federal-state program currently provides benefits to roughly 6
> million people, mostly children.
>
> A major point of contention with the White House was Bush's demand that
> nearly all poor children eligible for the program be found and enrolled
> before any in slightly higher-income families could be covered. He
> originally proposed adding $5 billion to the program over five years but
> later said he was willing to go higher as long as his conditions were met.
>
> The president also has opposed using an increased tobacco tax to fund the
> program expansion. The bill includes a 61-cent rise on a package of
> cigarettes.
>
> Bush's veto in early October of a similar bill was narrowly upheld by the
> House.
>
> But such votes are uncomfortable for GOP lawmakers. It is a popular
> program with the public, making some Republicans wary of sticking with
> Bush on such an issue with the 2008 elections looming. Of the 43 million
> people nationwide who lack health insurance, more than 6 million are under
> 18 years old. That's more than 9 percent of all children.
>
> House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said the House will take up the
> extension question Thursday in a bill that also will make adjustments to
> Medicare.
>
> "We'll obviously need to put additional money" into the children's health
> insurance program, Hoyer said, because several states say they will have
> to remove recipients from their rolls if the current funding level
> continues into next year.
>
> Hoyer declined to say how much new money would go into the program or how
> long it might be extended. In the past, top Democrats have suggested they
> might extend the program until September or October, allowing them to
> reconsider it shortly before the 2008 elections.
>
> Leading up to Bush's quiet late-afternoon action, the White House and
> Democratic leaders sought the upper hand with the public - with each
> blaming the other for causing the stalemate and being unwilling to give
> ground.
>
> In his veto statement, Bush said: "The leadership in the Congress has
> refused to meet with my administration's representatives." White House
> press secretary Dana Perino said that "even on a staff level, we weren't
> invited to negotiate."
>
> "They've instead been intransigent and sent us two bills that they knew he
> wouldn't sign," she scoffed.
>
> Not so, said Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid,
> D-Nev.
>
> For instance, Reid approached Bush to ask for negotiations during a
> ceremony for the Dalai Lama in the Capitol Rotunda in mid-October, a
> couple of weeks after Bush's first SCHIP veto, he said. The president told
> Reid, "No, I'm not moving, meet with my staff," Reid said at the time.
>
> "The fact is that Senator Reid and Speaker (Nancy) Pelosi asked to meet
> with the president to discuss giving children the health care they need,
> and he blew them off by telling them to talk to his staff," Manley said
> before the veto. "Now he's going to veto it for a second time without
> negotiating once."
>
> ---
>
> Associated Press writer Charles Babington contributed to this report.
>
>

tak, 12/12/2007,6:15:55 PM, wrote:

> In a statement notifying Congress of his decision, Bush said the bill
> was unacceptable because - like the first one - it allows adults into
> the program, would cover people in families with incomes above the
> U.S. median and raises taxes.
>
> "This bill does not put poor children first, and it moves our
> country's health care system in the wrong direction," Bush's
> statement said. "Ultimately, our nation's goal should be to move
> children who have no health insurance to private coverage, not to
> move children who already have private health insurance to government
> coverage."


Hopefully you read past the headline. He did the right thing by not
allowing socialized medicine another foothold. W hy were adults
included in the bill that is supposed to be for low income children?

"badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:xn0fevajt26pg44000@news.east.cox.net...
> tak, 12/12/2007,6:15:55 PM, wrote:
>
>> In a statement notifying Congress of his decision, Bush said the bill
>> was unacceptable because - like the first one - it allows adults into
>> the program, would cover people in families with incomes above the
>> U.S. median and raises taxes.
>>
>> "This bill does not put poor children first, and it moves our
>> country's health care system in the wrong direction," Bush's
>> statement said. "Ultimately, our nation's goal should be to move
>> children who have no health insurance to private coverage, not to
>> move children who already have private health insurance to government
>> coverage."
>
>
> Hopefully you read past the headline. He did the right thing by not
> allowing socialized medicine another foothold. W hy were adults
> included in the bill that is supposed to be for low income children?

They're trying to make Bush the bad guy by making it unacceptable for him to
sign, then putting the onus on him by making sure the media only reports the
LEFT side of the story.

Then of course, they will pass it again in 2009 and Her Hillaryness will
sign it, of course. I still think she's got a lot of tricks up her sleeve
and will find some way to get past Obama and the Breck Girl.

Charles the Curmudgeon

Your President is trying to lead. That's his job.

He vetoed a bill several weeks ago, and this one is nearly identical and has
all of the same objectionable elements as the last one. If Reid and Pelosi
would get off of their dead asses and give Bush a bill that actually does
what the President wants it to do, then you can be sure he would sign it.

Bush is SUPPOSED to blow off legislators and tell them to meet with his
staff. That's what he has staff for, to meet with legislators to hammer out
the Big Picture so he can then meet with legilators to work on details. The
Prez says, "I want a bill that does this ..." and refuses to sign any bill
that does not meet his demand. That's called leading.

You might not like the style, but that's his job and he is doing it.

<end top post>


"tak" <takirch@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:LYZ7j.353$7d1.150@news01.roc.ny...
> The Compassionate Conservative strikes again:
>
> By JENNIFER LOVEN
>
> (AP) President Bush is seen in the Oval Office of the
> White House in Washington, Wednesday, Dec. 12,...
> Full Image
>
>
>
> Google sponsored links
> George W. Bush: Fast Poll - 30-second poll.
> Do You Like President George Bush?
> www.indpolls.com/gc/George-W
>
>
> Anti Bush T-shirts - Anti-Bush T-shirts,
> Stickers, Magnets, Dolls, etc.
> www.northernsun.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush vetoed legislation Wednesday that would
> have expanded government-provided health insurance for children, his
> second slap-down of a bipartisan effort in Congress to dramatically
> increase funding for the popular program.
>
> It was Bush's seventh veto in seven years - all but one coming since
> Democrats took control of Congress in January. Wednesday was the deadline
> for Bush to act or let the bill become law. The president also vetoed an
> earlier, similar bill expanding the health insurance program.
>
> Bush vetoed the bill in private.
>
> In a statement notifying Congress of his decision, Bush said the bill was
> unacceptable because - like the first one - it allows adults into the
> program, would cover people in families with incomes above the U.S. median
> and raises taxes.
>
> "This bill does not put poor children first, and it moves our country's
> health care system in the wrong direction," Bush's statement said.
> "Ultimately, our nation's goal should be to move children who have no
> health insurance to private coverage, not to move children who already
> have private health insurance to government coverage."
>
> Bush urged Congress to extend the program at its current funding level
> before lawmakers leave Washington for their holiday break.
>
> In fact, congressional leaders had already said earlier Wednesday that
> they now will try only to extend the State Children's Health Insurance
> Program, or SCHIP, well into 2008 in basically its current form. Their
> comments signaled that they have given up efforts to substantially expand
> the program.
>
> The bill passed the Democratic-controlled Senate by a veto-proof margin,
> but the same was not true in the House. Even after the bill was approved,
> negotiations continued to find a compromise version that would attract
> enough Republican lawmakers to override Bush's expected veto. A two-thirds
> vote in both chambers is required to override a presidential veto.
>
> But that effort was unsuccessful.
>
> The bill Bush vetoed would have increased federal funding for SCHIP by $35
> billion over five years, to add an estimated 4 million people to the
> program that provides insurance coverage for children from families who
> earn too much to qualify for Medicaid but cannot afford private insurance.
> The joint federal-state program currently provides benefits to roughly 6
> million people, mostly children.
>
> A major point of contention with the White House was Bush's demand that
> nearly all poor children eligible for the program be found and enrolled
> before any in slightly higher-income families could be covered. He
> originally proposed adding $5 billion to the program over five years but
> later said he was willing to go higher as long as his conditions were met.
>
> The president also has opposed using an increased tobacco tax to fund the
> program expansion. The bill includes a 61-cent rise on a package of
> cigarettes.
>
> Bush's veto in early October of a similar bill was narrowly upheld by the
> House.
>
> But such votes are uncomfortable for GOP lawmakers. It is a popular
> program with the public, making some Republicans wary of sticking with
> Bush on such an issue with the 2008 elections looming. Of the 43 million
> people nationwide who lack health insurance, more than 6 million are under
> 18 years old. That's more than 9 percent of all children.
>
> House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said the House will take up the
> extension question Thursday in a bill that also will make adjustments to
> Medicare.
>
> "We'll obviously need to put additional money" into the children's health
> insurance program, Hoyer said, because several states say they will have
> to remove recipients from their rolls if the current funding level
> continues into next year.
>
> Hoyer declined to say how much new money would go into the program or how
> long it might be extended. In the past, top Democrats have suggested they
> might extend the program until September or October, allowing them to
> reconsider it shortly before the 2008 elections.
>
> Leading up to Bush's quiet late-afternoon action, the White House and
> Democratic leaders sought the upper hand with the public - with each
> blaming the other for causing the stalemate and being unwilling to give
> ground.
>
> In his veto statement, Bush said: "The leadership in the Congress has
> refused to meet with my administration's representatives." White House
> press secretary Dana Perino said that "even on a staff level, we weren't
> invited to negotiate."
>
> "They've instead been intransigent and sent us two bills that they knew he
> wouldn't sign," she scoffed.
>
> Not so, said Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid,
> D-Nev.
>
> For instance, Reid approached Bush to ask for negotiations during a
> ceremony for the Dalai Lama in the Capitol Rotunda in mid-October, a
> couple of weeks after Bush's first SCHIP veto, he said. The president told
> Reid, "No, I'm not moving, meet with my staff," Reid said at the time.
>
> "The fact is that Senator Reid and Speaker (Nancy) Pelosi asked to meet
> with the president to discuss giving children the health care they need,
> and he blew them off by telling them to talk to his staff," Manley said
> before the veto. "Now he's going to veto it for a second time without
> negotiating once."
>
> ---
>
> Associated Press writer Charles Babington contributed to this report.
>
>

Jeff Strickland wrote:
> Your President is trying to lead. That's his job.
>
> He vetoed a bill several weeks ago, and this one is nearly identical and
> has all of the same objectionable elements as the last one. If Reid and
> Pelosi would get off of their dead asses and give Bush a bill that
> actually does what the President wants it to do, then you can be sure he
> would sign it.

Why go through all the trouble? Did he give up on those illegal signing
statements? During his first term Bush raised a remarkable 505
constitutional challenges (signing statements) to various provisions of
legislation that became law, effectively rewriting the laws by
reinterpreting how the law will be implemented.

Bush is using signing statements like line item vetoes. Yet the Supreme
Court has held the line item vetoes are unconstitutional. In 1988, in
Clinton v. New York, the High Court said a president had to veto an
entire law: Even Congress, with its Line Item Veto Act, could not permit
him to veto provisions he might not like.

http://tinyurl.com/27qhz7

"badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:xn0fevajt26pg44000@news.east.cox.net...
> tak, 12/12/2007,6:15:55 PM, wrote:
>
>> In a statement notifying Congress of his decision, Bush said the bill
>> was unacceptable because - like the first one - it allows adults into
>> the program, would cover people in families with incomes above the
>> U.S. median and raises taxes.
>>
>> "This bill does not put poor children first, and it moves our
>> country's health care system in the wrong direction," Bush's
>> statement said. "Ultimately, our nation's goal should be to move
>> children who have no health insurance to private coverage, not to
>> move children who already have private health insurance to government
>> coverage."
>
>
> Hopefully you read past the headline. He did the right thing by not
> allowing socialized medicine another foothold. W hy were adults
> included in the bill that is supposed to be for low income children?

With over 40 million Americans without medical insurance IIRC, maybe it's
time to try something more "Compassionate". We wind up paying (more) anyway
as these non-covered folks use the ER for acute care or wait until major
illness rather than preventive Rx forces them on public assistance.

Jeff Strickland wrote:
> Your President is trying to lead. That's his job.
>
> He vetoed a bill several weeks ago, and this one is nearly identical and has
> all of the same objectionable elements as the last one. If Reid and Pelosi
> would get off of their dead asses and give Bush a bill that actually does
> what the President wants it to do, then you can be sure he would sign it.
>
> Bush is SUPPOSED to blow off legislators and tell them to meet with his
> staff. That's what he has staff for, to meet with legislators to hammer out
> the Big Picture so he can then meet with legilators to work on details. The
> Prez says, "I want a bill that does this ..." and refuses to sign any bill
> that does not meet his demand. That's called leading.

That is as dumb as anything Bush himself has said.

tak, 12/13/2007,3:41:38 AM, wrote:

>
> "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:xn0fevajt26pg44000@news.east.cox.net...
> > tak, 12/12/2007,6:15:55 PM, wrote:
> >
> > > In a statement notifying Congress of his decision, Bush said the
> > > bill was unacceptable because - like the first one - it allows
> > > adults into the program, would cover people in families with
> > > incomes above the U.S. median and raises taxes.
> > >
> > > "This bill does not put poor children first, and it moves our
> > > country's health care system in the wrong direction," Bush's
> > > statement said. "Ultimately, our nation's goal should be to move
> > > children who have no health insurance to private coverage, not to
> > > move children who already have private health insurance to
> > > government coverage."
> >
> >
> > Hopefully you read past the headline. He did the right thing by not
> > allowing socialized medicine another foothold. W hy were adults
> > included in the bill that is supposed to be for low income children?
>
> With over 40 million Americans without medical insurance IIRC, maybe
> it's time to try something more "Compassionate". We wind up paying
> (more) anyway as these non-covered folks use the ER for acute care or
> wait until major illness rather than preventive Rx forces them on
> public assistance.

How many of those folks you mention are illegal aliens?

--
"Why hate someone for the color of their skin when there are much
better reasons to hate them." ~ Denis Leary

"badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:xn0few0ww2pev7q001@news.east.cox.net...
> tak, 12/13/2007,3:41:38 AM, wrote:
>
>>
>> "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:xn0fevajt26pg44000@news.east.cox.net...
>> > tak, 12/12/2007,6:15:55 PM, wrote:
>> >
>> > > In a statement notifying Congress of his decision, Bush said the
>> > > bill was unacceptable because - like the first one - it allows
>> > > adults into the program, would cover people in families with
>> > > incomes above the U.S. median and raises taxes.
>> > >
>> > > "This bill does not put poor children first, and it moves our
>> > > country's health care system in the wrong direction," Bush's
>> > > statement said. "Ultimately, our nation's goal should be to move
>> > > children who have no health insurance to private coverage, not to
>> > > move children who already have private health insurance to
>> > > government coverage."
>> >
>> >
>> > Hopefully you read past the headline. He did the right thing by not
>> > allowing socialized medicine another foothold. W hy were adults
>> > included in the bill that is supposed to be for low income children?
>>
>> With over 40 million Americans without medical insurance IIRC, maybe
>> it's time to try something more "Compassionate". We wind up paying
>> (more) anyway as these non-covered folks use the ER for acute care or
>> wait until major illness rather than preventive Rx forces them on
>> public assistance.
>
> How many of those folks you mention are illegal aliens?
>
That may be the operant point in your version of Christianity but you still
can't turn away people at the ER in most (all?) states.